Simkulet William
Bioethics. 2018 Jan;32(1):10-15. doi: 10.1111/bioe.12409. Epub 2017 Nov 24.
Don Marquis is well known for his future like ours theory (FLO), according to which the killing beings like us is seriously morally wrong because it deprives us of a future we can value. According to Marquis, human fetuses possess a future they can come to value, and thus according to FLO have a right to life. Recently Mark Brown has argued that even if FLO shows fetuses have a right to life, it fails to show that fetuses have a right to use their mother's body, evoking Judith Jarvis Thomson's famous violinist case. In the wake of Brown's conclusion, Marquis presents a new argument-the parenthood argument (PA)-which he believes shows that abortion is seriously morally wrong. Here I argue that the PA fails to show abortion is seriously morally wrong for the same reasons FLO fails to show abortion is seriously morally wrong.
唐·马奎斯因其“像我们一样的未来”理论(FLO)而闻名,根据该理论,杀害像我们这样的生物在道德上是严重错误的,因为这剥夺了我们一个我们能够珍视的未来。按照马奎斯的说法,人类胎儿拥有一个他们能够逐渐珍视的未来,因此根据FLO,他们拥有生命权。最近马克·布朗认为,即使FLO表明胎儿拥有生命权,但它未能表明胎儿有权使用其母亲的身体,这让人联想到朱迪思·贾维斯·汤姆森著名的小提琴家案例。在布朗得出结论之后,马奎斯提出了一个新的论证——亲权论证(PA),他认为这表明堕胎在道德上是严重错误的。在此我认为,出于与FLO未能表明堕胎在道德上是严重错误的相同原因,PA也未能表明堕胎在道德上是严重错误的。